Poverty is the enemy.

It attacks all ages, genders and can be found around the

globe. Authorities on this subject have clear-cut ideas where to lay the blame.
According to Patrick F. Fagan, who is the William H.G. FitzGerald Senior Fellow in
family and cultural issues at the Heritage Foundation, believes that “the likelihood
of whether a child will live in poverty is greatly influenced by the marital status of
the child’s parents. Studies show that children of single parents are six times more
likely to be impoverished than children whose parents are married” Fagan asserts.
Furthermore, “divorce is closely
“Children born out of wedlock, especially to teenage mothers, also experience high
rates of poverty,” Fagan continues. “This cycle often continues in the next
generation, since children of single parents are more likely to get pregnant before
marriage, which lessens the likelihood that they will complete their education and
obtain a good-paying job—thus making it more likely that their children will also be
raised in poverty.”
Jack M. Hollander, a professor of energy and resources at the University of
California, Berkeley blames poverty for another problem: environmental
degradation. “The real enemy of the environment is poverty—the tragedy of billions
of the world's inhabitants who face hunger, disease, and ignorance each day of their
lives. Poverty is the environmental villain; poor people are its victims. Impoverished
people often do plunder their resources, pollute their environment, and overcrowd
their habitats. They do these things not out of willful neglect but only out of the
need to survive.”
Quan Li and Drew Schaub, professors of political science at Pennsylvania State
University, extends the problems of privation ever further, alleging that the primary
cause of terrorism is poverty. “Because poverty causes feelings of military and
economic inferiority, people affected by it choose violent means to express their
discontent.” Consistent with this argument, [President George W.] Bush claimed, in
a widely cited speech, that the United States would “ fight against poverty because
hope is an answer to terror.”
Numerous academic and social science researchers have demonstrated how the
path to achieving a decent and stable income is still the traditional one: complete
school, get a job, get married, then have children, in that order. Another factor, the
acquisition of a positive work ethic, may be especially vital in the war on poverty. Li
and Schaub believe that “for economic globalization to reduce transnational
terrorism, globalization has to be able to promote economic development and
reduce poverty.” As a consequence, Hollander states: “With the increase of freedom
and affluence—both are crucial—people are then likely to become motivated and
increasingly able to apply the necessary political will, economic resources, and
technological ingenuity to address environmental issues more broadly.” Poverty is
indeed the enemy. It has a negative ripple effect on families, the environment and
society as a whole.
POVERTY: THE ROOT OF ALL EVIL

As the margin of the rich and the poor widens, global poverty to day has increased,
the middle class cannot catch up with the rich and slid back among the poor
causing the numbers of the poor to rise up,poverty in today's global village has
become the root cause of all evils, because it has power and the ability to make
people compromise their once held and respected moral values, cultures and
religious beliefs, poverty has created a new race of people with common marks of
frustrations, loss of hope, prospects and value for life.
Loss of the meaning of life, purpose of living something to live for and
disillusionments about morality because the criminals live better, poverty which
knows no boarder has pushed societies to loose human hearts and compassion for
others, if one is hungry, stealing,prostitution will be an opted for solution, life
becomes the survival of the fittest, in order to survive people engage in crime of all
sorts including fraud, money laundering drug trafficking, sex trade and corruption .
The saying an hungry man is an angry man has always been the true reflection of
what mankind is capable of once the biological and basic need for food ,water
,shelter and other basic necessities if not attended to has bred waves of evil in the
minds and hearts of the people.
The fact is that it is poverty and greed that breeds corruption, so it goes without
saying that where poverty is alleviated, corrupt practices would be minimal or
alleviated as well ( for corruption can never be eradicated and has not been
eradicated anywhere in the world ) in other words poverty is a cause of corruption
while corruption is the consequence of poverty and loss of moral values ,the high
levels of poverty have resulted in many social problems including street kids, these
kids are automatically exposed to various types of risks and hazards depending on
the the socio-economic characteristics of the neighborhoods in which street are
located all these is a result of poverty
POVERTY: THE ROOT OF ALL EVIL

As the margin of the rich and the poor widens, global poverty to day has increased,
the middle class cannot catch up with the rich and slid back among the poor
causing the numbers of the poor to rise up,poverty in today's global village has
become the root cause of all evils, because it has power and the ability to make
people compromise their once held and respected moral values, cultures and
religious beliefs, poverty has created a new race of people with common marks of
frustrations, loss of hope, prospects and value for life.
Loss of the meaning of life, purpose of living something to live for and
disillusionments about morality because the criminals live better, poverty which
knows no boarder has pushed societies to loose human hearts and compassion for
others, if one is hungry, stealing,prostitution will be an opted for solution, life
becomes the survival of the fittest, in order to survive people engage in crime of all
sorts including fraud, money laundering drug trafficking, sex trade and corruption .
The saying an hungry man is an angry man has always been the true reflection of
what mankind is capable of once the biological and basic need for food ,water
,shelter and other basic necessities if not attended to has bred waves of evil in the
minds and hearts of the people.
The fact is that it is poverty and greed that breeds corruption, so it goes without
saying that where poverty is alleviated, corrupt practices would be minimal or
alleviated as well ( for corruption can never be eradicated and has not been
eradicated anywhere in the world ) in other words poverty is a cause of corruption
while corruption is the consequence of poverty and loss of moral values ,the high
levels of poverty have resulted in many social problems including street kids, these
kids are automatically exposed to various types of risks and hazards depending on
the the socio-economic characteristics of the neighborhoods in which street are
located all these is a result of poverty.
As the margin of the rich and the poor widens, global poverty to day has increased,
the middle class cannot catch up with the rich and slid back among the poor
causing the numbers of the poor to rise up,poverty in today’s global village has
become the root cause of all evils, because it has power and the ability to make
people compromise their once held and respected moral values, cultures and
religious beliefs, poverty has created a new race of people with common marks of
frustrations, loss of hope, prospects and value for life.

Loss of the meaning of life, purpose of living something to live for and
disillusionments about morality because the criminals live better, poverty which
knows no boarder has pushed societies to loose human hearts and compassion for
others, if one is hungry, stealing,prostitution will be an opted for solution, life
becomes the survival of the fittest, in order to survive people engage in crime of all
sorts including fraud, money laundering drug trafficking, sex trade and corruption .
The saying an hungry man is an angry man has always been the true reflection of
what mankind is capable of once the biological and basic need for food ,water
,shelter and other basic necessities if not attended to has bred waves of evil in the
minds and hearts of the people.
The fact is that it is poverty and greed that breeds corruption, so it goes without
saying that where poverty is alleviated, corrupt practices would be minimal or
alleviated as well ( for corruption can never be eradicated and has not been
eradicated anywhere in the world ) in other words poverty is a cause of corruption
while corruption is the consequence of poverty and loss of moral values ,the high
levels of poverty have resulted in many social problems including street kids, these
kids are automatically exposed to various types of risks and hazards depending on
the the socio-economic characteristics of the neighborhoods in which street are
located all these is a result of poverty

I receive alot of criticism because of my stance on universal health care, with most
critics claiming I do not care about the poor. For starters I would like to make it
known that I do not believe those who cannot afford health care should be left for
dead, on the flip side however, I do not believe more government is the solution.
The solution to the health care crisis in this country aside from minor governmental
reforms such as deregulating the industry thereby allowing residents from one State
to purchase insurance in another, lies in the overwhelming number of people
currently living in poverty.
There has been much talk about the ‘war on poverty’ in this country and how the
government needs to do more to help those in need. More and more, Americans
appear to be relying on our government to take care of them, refusing to take any
blame whatsoever for their financial position.
Several years back the National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA) released a study
titled

How Not To Be Poor. The study outlined some of the common

traits those living below the poverty line shared, and offers a roadmap to
eradicating poverty in this country. The solution to the poverty crisis seems obvious
to some, but it bears repeating over and over again, because many just do not
grasp the concept.
Before looking at the solution to poverty in America, it is important to first examine
the cause of it. According the NCPA study, the majority of Americans living in
poverty shared some of the following characteristics:
 No High School Diploma
According to the 2001 Census Bureau
report, 22.2 percent of individuals without
a high school diploma were living in
poverty compared to only 9.6 percent of
those with a high school diploma.
Additionally 14.2 percent of high school
dropouts were living in long term poverty,
compared to only 3.8 percent of those
with high school diplomas who lived in
long term poverty.

Not Married
8.6 percent of
unmarried
adults with no
children live in
poverty, with
a staggering 51.6 percent of unmarried adults with 2 or
more children lived in poverty. Additionally the study
found nearly 80 percent of children living in long term
poverty live in some type of broken family or with a
never married parent.

There are those who would argue that a low minimum

wage is the underlying cause of poverty, or at least a
catalyst. Only 2.6 percent of individuals over the age of
16 with full time jobs are poor, as opposed to 11.4
percent of individuals who only work part time. Over the long term full time workers
have a 0.4 percent chance of being poor.
This study makes it apparent (at least to me) that the solution to poverty in America
is not more government programs, with more wealth redistribution. The answer lies
with the individual, more importantly with individual responsibility. In those who
finish high school, get married, have children only within a marriage and go to work,
the odds of long-term poverty are virtually nil.
The Michael Moore’s and Hillary Clinton’s of this country wish to “Move from me to
we”, creating a country where we each take responsibility for the actions of others.
This is precisely the oppossite of what needs to be done. Killing individualism, and
rewarding those who do not work by confiscating the property of those that do has
already proven in other countries to be bad government policy.
If Americans refuse to take responsibility for their actions on an individual level,
they are dooming us all to a life of government intervention and loss of personal
liberty.
For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil, for which some have strayed from
the faith in their greediness, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows. (1
Timothy 6:10 NKJV)

In our previous message, we talked about the inner struggle that some of us face — particularly
those who have been around Christianity for awhile — where business and financial success are
concerned. It isn’t too difficult to guess that one of the major contributors to this struggle is an
abundance of erroneous teaching about the Bible and what it really says.

For example, here’s a direct quote from a recent Newsweek article:

“For one thing, Scripture is full of exhortations against accumulating wealth. The New
Testament, especially, repeatedly reminds followers of Christ that earthly wealth means nothing
in heaven. ‘It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than a rich man to enter the
Kingdom of God,’ says Jesus.”

These few sentences are so full of misunderstanding about Scripture that it’s almost infuriating.
(Where does Newsweek get off interpreting Scripture anyway?!) But the tragedy is that many
churches have actually taught — arguably with good intentions — fallacies like this.

Another great example is the, “root of all evil,” Scripture referred to in the title of today’s
message. Not only is it frequently misquoted as, “money is the root of all evil,” but the entire
passage that it comes from is (in my experience) usually preached from a fundamental place of
misunderstanding.

If you’re hearing from those you look up to (spiritually speaking) that it’s wrong to accumulate
wealth, doesn’t that directly work against you? Isn’t business challenging enough without
wondering if God is upset with us for doing well in it? Is God so cruel as to require that we work
to provide for our families and even call us into the business world only to tell us that we are
only pleasing to Him when we fail?It’s time that we take a hard look at some of these teachings
and find out what the Scripture really says.

Materialism, Poverty and the Root of Evil

By: The Mystic | 17June2000

Consider materialism, not in the philosophical sense -- "the theory that physical
matter is the only reality..." or "the theory...that physical well-being and worldly
possessions constitute the greatest good..." -- but in the common, informal
sense, i.e., excessive regard for money and what it will buy.

There are many people who spend a great amount of time and energy thinking about money.
Day in and day out, practically their only concern is how to acquire more wealth and what
goods and services they'll buy when they get it. They can't seem to find time to enjoy the
worthwhile aspects of life that make it worthwhile, like well-balanced people enjoy:
romance, poetry, a good book, a sunset, spirituality...whatever clicks your lock. It seems so
sad, sometimes.

It's interesting how one's perspective changes over the years.

When I was a little kid, the world was made up of the "rich" and the rest of us. The "rich"
were people who owned a car that was newer than the ten-year-old Rambler my father
drove. (If they were exceedingly wealthy, they owned two cars.) They lived in houses where
every kid had his or her own bedroom. To the "rich", a vacation meant going somewhere
other than to stay with distant relatives, for two whole weeks at a time, and they didn't travel
cramped together with suitcases in a car, neither. We knew that all the "rich" thought about
was making money, spending money and what they could buy with it and paying good
money to eat in restaurants all the time instead of staying at home to eat like us decent folk.
The "rich" were materialists; two words that were practically synonymous in my juvenile
vocabulary.

Then I grew up, went away,

and spent some time in other
parts of the world. I met
people, some of whom were
so bastardly dirt poor that
their idea of "rich" meant
having electricity, a working
refrigerator and food in it too.
I have been inclined to agree
with them ever since.

Somewhere along the way, I

discarded my childhood ideas
about materialism too. I have
known people at various
levels of wealth and poverty.
Maybe it's just a strange coincidence, but it seems to me that the true materialists I've known
-- people who were greatly concerned with money and what they could buy with it --
happened to be the people who had little or none of it.

Every person I've ever met who consistently thought about money did so out of a painful
mixture of responsibility and necessity. They had to be materialistic; there were babies to
feed, rent to be paid, and barely (or not) enough money to cover it all, let alone take care of
unexpected emergencies.

Even though I have found it impossible to completely rid myself of the thought processes I
acquired in youth, in many ways, having known poverty first-hand has been useful. I learned
skills out of necessity that I probably wouldn't have bothered to learn otherwise. When your
car is broke down out in the sticks, far from a phone and a tow truck, it's nice to know how
to make that simple repair that will allow you to limp to a garage or auto parts store.

Another myth I believed as a child and later outgrew was the idea -- common among many
traditional religionists -- that poverty is somehow compatible with sainthood. There may be
some incredibly good people who choose to live in poverty. I've known the occasional hobo-
like person who had nothing and seemed happy enough, but they also had no responsibilities
and didn't mind living off the kindness of strangers or on the dole. (One that I met claimed to
have founded the Jesuits.)

However, many people don't have the luxury to choose to be poor [irony intended]; they just
are. Many "poor" people (that's as relative as is "rich") that I have met were not only
materialistic (again, out of necessity), they were also incredibly jealous of those who had
more. That's the reality behind the "rich people aren't happy" theory. That theory is crap!
Considering the third-world countries I have visited, I'm both rich (since I know I will eat
tomorrow and probably the next day) and happier than most of the impoverished people I
met overseas.

Given what some people have to do to make ends meet -- cheat, steal, borrow money they
know they can't pay back, sell their bodies -- money isn't the root of evil. If evil were a plant
with a single root, that root would be poverty.

That's not to say that "poor" people are bad because they are poor (or vice versa). The root of
poverty is usually nourished by social conditions and government-enabled limitations that
keep certain people -- whole societies, in some cases -- poor, regardless of how intelligent,
motivated and pure of heart they might be.

A ragged urchin, aimless and alone, Poverty often leads to society's common illnesses,
Loitered about that vacancy, a bird such as exploitation, substance abuse, child abuse,
Flew up to safety from his well-aimed domestic violence and -- ultimately -- war.
stone:
That girls are raped, that two boys Jesus of Nazareth said, "The poor will always be
knife a third, with us." I happen to agree with him on this point.
Were axioms to him, who'd never Short of selective breeding of the entire race, there
heard will always be a certain number of people who are
Of any world where promises were unskilled, unintelligent, unmotivated or unlucky.
kept, There will always be the necessity of charity (or
Or one could weep because another government subsidy, which has almost entirely
wept. replaced it).
-- From "The Shield of Achilles" by W.H.Auden It will also always be necessary for decent people
to fight the injustices that lead to poverty. The next
time some pious apologist for government
oppression and the status quo feeds you the line
that poverty is good for the soul, remember that
 when everybody's standard of living starts to increase, materialism will begin to decrease. If
s/he is blowing that particular brand of smoke up your arse, it must be in his or her self-
interest to keep you down.

[edit] Etymology
The word "poverty" came from Latin pauper = "poor", via Anglo-Norman povert.
http://qu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wakcha

[edit] Measuring poverty

Percentage of population suffering from hunger, World Food Programme, 2006

Percentage of population living on less than $1.25 per day. UN estimates 2000-
2006.

Life expectancy.

The Human Development Index.

The Gini coefficient, a measure of income inequality.

Life expectancy has been increasing and converging for most of the world. Sub-
Saharan Africa has recently seen a decline, partly related to the AIDS epidemic.
Graph shows the years 1950-2005.

[edit] Recent trends in absolute poverty

Poverty is usually measured as either absolute or relative poverty (the latter being actually an
index of income inequality). Absolute poverty refers to a set standard which is consistent over
time and between countries. An example of an absolute measurement would be the percentage of
the population eating less food than is required to sustain the human body (approximately 2000-
2500 calories per day for an adult male).

The World Bank defines extreme poverty as living on less than US $1 (PPP) per day, and
moderate poverty as less than $2 a day, estimating that "in 2001, 1.1 billion people had
consumption levels below $1 a day and 2.7 billion lived on less than $2 a day." [3] The proportion
of the developing world's population living in extreme economic poverty fell from 28 percent in
1990 to 21 percent in 2001.[3] Looking at the period 1981-2001, the percentage of the world's
population living on less than $1 per day has halved.
Most of this improvement has occurred in East and South Asia.[4] In East Asia the World Bank
reported that "The poverty headcount rate at the $2-a-day level is estimated to have fallen to
about 27 percent [in 2007], down from 29.5 percent in 2006 and 69 percent in 1990."[5]

In Sub-Saharan Africa extreme poverty went up from 41 percent in 1981 to 46 percent in 2001,
which combined with growing population increased the number of people living in poverty from
231 million to 318 million.[6]

In the early 1990s some of the transition economies of Eastern Europe and Central Asia
experienced a sharp drop in income.[7] The collapse of the Soviet Union resulted in large declines
in GDP per capita, of about 30 to 35% between 1990 and the trough year of 1998 (when it was at
its minimum). GDP per capita in Ukraine dropped from $7,185 in 1990 to $3,628 in 1996.[8] As a
result poverty rates also increased although in subsequent years as per capita incomes recovered
the poverty rate dropped from 31.4% of the population to 19.6%[9][10]

World Bank data shows that the percentage of the population living in households with
consumption or income per person below the poverty line has decreased in each region of the
world since 1990:[11][12]

Region 1990 2002 2004

15.40 12.33
East Asia and Pacific 9.07%
% %

Europe and Central Asia 3.60% 1.28% 0.95%

Latin America and the

9.62% 9.08% 8.64%
Caribbean

Middle East and North

2.08% 1.69% 1.47%
Africa

35.04 33.44 30.84

South Asia
% % %

46.07 42.63 41.09

Sub-Saharan Africa
% % %
Other human development indicators have also been improving. Life expectancy has greatly
increased in the developing world since WWII and is starting to close the gap to the developed
world. Child mortality has decreased in every developing region of the world.[citation needed] The
proportion of the world's population living in countries where per-capita food supplies are less
than 2,200 calories (9,200 kilojoules) per day decreased from 56% in the mid-1960s to below
10% by the 1990s. Similar trends can be observed for literacy, access to clean water and
electricity and basic consumer items.[13]

There are various criticisms of these measurements.[14] Shaohua Chen and Martin Ravallion note
that although "a clear trend decline in the percentage of people who are absolutely poor is
evident ... with uneven progress across regions...the developing world outside China and India
has seen little or no sustained progress in reducing the number of poor".

Since the world's population is increasing, a constant number living in poverty would be
associated with a diminshing proportion. Looking at the percentage living on less than $1/day,
and if excluding China and India, then this percentage has decreased from 31.35% to 20.70%
between 1981 and 2004.[15]

The 2007 World Bank report "Global Economic Prospects" predicts that in 2030 the number
living on less than the equivalent of $1 a day will fall by half, to about 550 million. An average
resident of what we used to call the Third World will live about as well as do residents of the
Czech or Slovak republics today. Much of Africa will have difficulty keeping pace with the rest
of the developing world and even if conditions there improve in absolute terms, the report warns,
Africa in 2030 will be home to a larger proportion of the world's poorest people than it is
today.[16]

[edit] Absolute poverty in US

Main article: Poverty in the United States

Poverty in a developed nation, as seen in Harlem, New York, USA. In 2006 the
poverty rate for minors in the United States was the highest in the industrialized
world, with 21.9% of all minors and 30% of African American minors living below the
poverty threshold.[17]

The US poverty line was created in 1963-64 and was based on the dollar costs of the United
States Department of Agriculture's "economy food plan" multiplied by a factor of three. The
multiplier was based on research showing that food costs then accounted for about one third of
the total money income. This one-time calculation has since been annually updated for
inflation.[18] Some economists such as Ellen Frank, argue that the poverty measure is too low as
families spend much less of their total budget on food than they did when the measure was
established. Further, federal poverty statistics do not account for the widely varying regional
differences in non-food costs such as housing, transport, and utilities
Relative poverty

Relative poverty views poverty as socially defined and dependent on social context, hence
relative poverty is a measure of income inequality. Usually, relative poverty is measured as the
percentage of population with income less than some fixed proportion of median income. There
are several other different income inequality metrics, for example the Gini coefficient or the
Theil Index.

Relative poverty measures are used as official poverty rates in several developed countries. As
such these poverty statistics measure inequality rather than material deprivation or hardship. The
measurements are usually based on a person's yearly income and frequently take no account of
total wealth. The main poverty line used in the OECD and the European Union is based on
"economic distance", a level of income set at 50% of the median household income.

[edit] Other aspects

Economic aspects of poverty focus on material needs, typically including the necessities of daily
living, such as food, clothing, shelter, or safe drinking water. Poverty in this sense may be
understood as a condition in which a person or community is lacking in the basic needs for a
minimum standard of well-being and life, particularly as a result of a persistent lack of income.

Analysis of social aspects of poverty links conditions of scarcity to aspects of the distribution of
resources and power in a society and recognizes that poverty may be a function of the diminished
"capability" of people to live the kinds of lives they value.[20] The social aspects of poverty may
include lack of access to information, education, health care, or political power.[21][22] Poverty
may also be understood as an aspect of unequal social status and inequitable social relationships,
experienced as social exclusion, dependency, and diminished capacity to participate, or to
develop meaningful connections with other people in society.[23][24][25]

The World Bank's "Voices of the Poor," based on research with over 20,000 poor people in 23
countries, identifies a range of factors which poor people identify as part of poverty. [26] These
include:

• Precarious livelihoods
• Excluded locations
• Physical limitations
• Gender relationships
• Problems in social relationships
• Lack of security
• Abuse by those in power
• Dis-empowering institutions
• Limited capabilities
• Weak community organizations
David Moore, in his book The World Bank, argues that some analysis of poverty reflect
pejorative, sometimes racial, stereotypes of impoverished people as powerless victims and
passive recipients of aid programs.[27]

[edit] Causes of poverty

Street children sleeping in Mulberry Street - Jacob Riis photo New York, United States
of America (1890)

Many different factors have been cited to explain why poverty occurs; no single explanation has
gained universal acceptance.

Possible factors include:

[edit] Economics

• Recession. In general the major fluctuations in poverty rates over time are
driven by the business cycle. Poverty rates increase in recessions and decline
in booms. Extreme recessions, such as the Great Depression have a
particularly large impact on poverty. In 1933, 25% of all workers and 37% of
all nonfarm workers in the United States were unemployed.[28] In New York,
one child in every five was hungry.[29]

• Economic inequality. Even if average income is high it may be the case that
the poverty rate is also high if incomes are distributed unevenly. However the
evidence on the relationship between absolute poverty rates and inequality is
mixed and sensitive to the inequality index used. For example, while many
Sub-Saharan African countries have both high inequality and high poverty
rates, other countries, such as India have low inequality and high poverty
rates.[citation needed] In general the extent of poverty is much more closely related
to average income than it is to the variance in its distribution. At the same
time some research indicates that countries which start with a more
equitable distribution of income find it easier to eradicate poverty through
economic growth [30] In addition to income inequality, an unequal distribution
of land can also contribute to high levels of poverty.[31]
 • Shocks to food prices. Poor people spend a greater portion of their budgets
on food than richer people. As a result poor households, and those near the
poverty threshold can be particularly vulnerable to increases in food prices.
For example in late 2007 increases in the price of grains [32] led to food riots in
some countries[33][34][35]. Decreases in food prices can also affect poverty
although they tend to impact a different group - small farmers - than food
price increases.

[edit] Governance

• Lacking democracy in poor countries: "The records when we look at social

dimensions of development—access to drinking water, girls' literacy, health
care—are even more starkly divergent. For example, in terms of life
expectancy, rich democracies typically enjoy life expectancies that are nine
years longer than poor autocracies. Opportunities of finishing secondary
school are 40 percent higher. Infant mortality rates are 25 percent lower.
Agricultural yields are about 25 percent higher, on average, in poor
democracies than in poor autocracies—an important fact, given that 70
percent of the population in poor countries is often rural-based.""poor
democracies don't spend any more on their health and education sectors as a
percentage of GDP than do poor autocracies, nor do they get higher levels of
foreign assistance. They don't run up higher levels of budget deficits. They
simply manage the resources that they have more effectively." [15]

• The governance effectiveness of governments has a major impact on the

delivery of socioeconomic outcomes for poor populations[36]
• Weak rule of law can discourage investment and thus perpetuate poverty.[37]
• Poor management of resource revenues can mean that rather than lifting
countries out of poverty, revenues from such activities as oil production or
gold mining actually leads to a resource curse.
• Failure by governments to provide essential infrastructure worsens
poverty.[38][39].
• Poor access to affordable education traps individuals and countries in cycles
of poverty.[38]
• High levels of corruption undermine efforts to make a sustainable impact on
poverty. In Nigeria, for example, more than $400 billion was stolen from the
treasury by Nigeria's leaders between 1960 and 1999.[40][41]

Welfare states have an effect on poverty reduction. Currently modern, expansive

welfare states that ensure economic opportunity, independence and security in a
near universal manner are still the exclusive domain of the developed nations,[42]
commonly constituting at least 20% of GDP, with the largest Scandinavian welfare
states constituting over 40% of GDP.[43] These modern welfare states, which largely
arose in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, seeing their greatest expansion in the
mid 20th century, and have proven themselves highly effective in reducing relative
as well as absolute poverty in all analyzed high-income OECD countries.[44][45][46]
 INTRODUCTION
The world poverty came from latten pauper means poor. Poverty is a measure of
income in equality. Usually,

Poverty is usually measured as either absolute or relative poverty (the latter

being actually an index of income inequality). Absolute poverty refers to a
set standard which is consistent over time and between countries. An
example of an absolute measurement would be the percentage of the
population eating less food than is required to sustain the human body
(approximately 2000-2500 calories per day for an adult male). Relative poverty
is measured as the percentage of population with income less then some fixed proportion on
median income. Hence in equal incomes ignites the poverty which is root cause of all evils.

The World Bank defines extreme poverty as living on less than US $1 per day, and
moderate poverty as less than $2 a day, estimating that "in 2001, 1.1 billion people
had consumption levels below $1 a day and 2.7 billion lived on less than $2 a day.
The proportion of the developing world's population living in extreme economic
poverty fell from 28 percent in 1990 to 21 percent in 2001. Looking at the period
1981-2001, the percentage of the world's population living on less than $1 per day
has halved.

POVERTY IS THE ENEMY

Poverty is the worst enemy for the under developing countries especially for ASIA
and AFRICA. Many living examples have been seen in these part of the world such
as people are compel to sell their integral parts of their body and mother have been
seen to sell their babies to satisfy their hunger. Further more socio economics
status of such countries has not been up to the mark and due to social injustice
poor becomes poorer and the rich becomes richer. Likewise if social justices not
administered properly definitely all evils take place in the society. Our country
Came into existence in 1947 on the principle that rule of Allah will be the rule of this
country. Unfortunately our leaders totally denied what they promise at the time of
its creation. Resultantly the situation which we are facing today is due to our own
mistakes and the nation to come will not spare us.

The problem of poverty can be over come if we practice Islamic rule of laws in
country and justice can be provided to the effected on their doorsteps.

Here we can take examples of HAZRAT UMER FAROOQ in his era system was so
effective that all the rich peoples were use to pay zakat, and it was distributed
among real needy peoples. As a result a time came when there was no needy
person to receive zakat.

Our leader should follow the footsteps of HAZRAT UMER FAROOQ. And declare war
against the defaulters who do not pay zakat.
poverty attacks all ages, genders and can be found around the globe. Authorities on
this subject have clear-cut ideas where to lay the blame. Experts believe that “the
likelihood of whether a child will live in poverty is greatly influenced by the marital
status of the child’s parents. Studies show that children of single parents are six
times more likely to be impoverished than children whose parents are married.

Children born out of wedlock, especially to teenage mothers, also experience high
rates of poverty. This cycle often continues in the next generation, since children of
single parents are more likely to get pregnant before marriage, which lessens the
likelihood, that they will complete their education and obtain a good-paying job—
thus making it more likely that their children will also be raised in poverty.

The real enemy of the environment is poverty—the tragedy of billions of the world's
inhabitants who face hunger, disease, and ignorance each day of their lives. Poverty
is the environmental villain; poor people are its victims. Impoverished people often
do plunder their resources, pollute their environment, and overcrowd their habitats.
They do these things not out of willful neglect but only out of the need to survive.”

Critics believe that “primary cause of terrorism is poverty. “Because poverty causes
feelings of military and economic inferiority, people affected by it choose violent
means to express their discontent.”

Numerous academic and social science researchers have demonstrated how the
path to achieving a decent and stable income is still the traditional one: complete
school, get a job, get married, and then have children, in that order. Another factor,
the acquisition of a positive work ethic, may be especially vital in the war on
poverty.

As the margin of the rich and the poor widens, global poverty to day has increased,
the middle class cannot catch up with the rich and slid back among the poor
causing the numbers of the poor to rise up, poverty in today's global village has
become the root cause of all evils, because it has power and the ability to make
people compromise their once held and respected moral values, cultures and
religious beliefs, poverty has created a new race of people with common marks of
frustrations, loss of hope, prospects and value for life. Loss of the meaning of life,
purpose of living something to live for and disillusionments about morality because
the criminals live better, poverty which knows no boarder has pushed societies to
loose human hearts and compassion for others, if one is hungry, stealing,
prostitution will be an opted for solution, life becomes the survival of the fittest, in
order to survive people engage in crime of all sorts including fraud, money
laundering drug trafficking, sex trade and corruption .The saying an hungry man is
an angry man has always been the true reflection of what mankind is capable of
once the biological and basic need for food ,water ,shelter and other basic
necessities if not attended to has bred waves of evil in the minds and hearts of the
people.
The fact is that it is poverty and greed that breeds corruption, so it goes without
saying that where poverty is alleviated, corrupt practices would be minimal or
alleviated as well ( for corruption can never be eradicated and has not been
eradicated anywhere in the world ) in other words poverty is a cause of corruption
while corruption is the consequence of poverty and loss of moral values ,the high
levels of poverty have resulted in many social problems including street kids, these
kids are automatically exposed to various types of risks and hazards depending on
the socio-economic characteristics of the neighborhoods in which street are located
all these is a result of poverty.

FACTORS LEADING TO POVERTY

Economic aspects of poverty focus on material needs, typically including the

necessities of daily living, such as food, clothing, shelter, or safe drinking
water. Poverty in this sense may be understood as a condition in which a
person or community is lacking in the basic needs for a minimum standard of
well-being and life, particularly as a result of a persistent lack of income.

Analysis of social aspects of poverty links conditions of scarcity to aspects of

the distribution of resources and power in a society and recognizes that
poverty may be a function of the diminished "capability" of people to live the
kinds of lives they value. The social aspects of poverty may include lack of
access to information, education, health care, or political power. Poverty may
also be understood as an aspect of unequal social status and inequitable
social relationships, experienced as social exclusion, dependency, and
diminished capacity to participate, or to develop meaningful connections
with other people in society.

The World Bank's "Voices of the Poor," based on research with over 20,000
poor people in 23 countries, identifies a range of factors which poor people
identify as part of poverty. These include:

• Precarious livelihoods
• Excluded locations
• Physical limitations
• Gender relationships
• Problems in social relationships
• Lack of security
• Abuse by those in power
• Dis-empowering institutions
• Limited capabilities
• Weak community organizations

CAUSES OF POVERTY

Many different factors have been cited to explain why poverty occurs; no
single explanation has gained universal acceptance.

Possible factors include:

Economics
Recession. In general the major fluctuations in poverty rates over time are driven by
the business cycle. Poverty rates increase in recessions and decline in booms.
Extreme recessions, such as the Great Depression have a particularly large impact
on poverty. In 1933, 25% of all workers and 37% of all nonfarm workers in the
United States were unemployed.[28] In New York, one child in every five was
hungry.
Economic inequality. Even if average income is high it may be the case that the
poverty rate is also high if incomes are distributed unevenly. However the evidence
on the relationship between absolute poverty rates and inequality is mixed and
sensitive to the inequality index used. For example, while many Sub-Saharan African
countries have both high inequality and high poverty rates, other countries, such as
India have low inequality and high poverty rates. In general the extent of poverty is
much more closely related to average income than it is to the variance in its
distribution. At the same time some research indicates that countries which start
with a more equitable distribution of income find it easier to eradicate poverty
through economic growth In addition to income inequality, an unequal distribution
of land can also contribute to high levels of poverty.
Shocks to food prices. Poor people spend a greater portion of their budgets on food
than richer people. As a result poor households and those near the poverty
threshold can be particularly vulnerable to increases in food prices. For example in
late 2007 increases in the price of grains led to food riots in some countries.
Decreases in food prices can also affect poverty although they tend to impact a
different group - small farmers - than food price increases.

Governance
Lacking democracy in poor countries: "The records when we look at social
dimensions of development—access to drinking water, girls' literacy, health care—
are even more starkly divergent. For example, in terms of life expectancy, rich
democracies typically enjoy life expectancies that are nine years longer than poor
autocracies. Opportunities of finishing secondary school are 40 percent higher.
Infant mortality rates are 25 percent lower. Agricultural yields are about 25 percent
higher, on average, in poor democracies than in poor autocracies—an important
fact, given that 70 percent of the population in poor countries is often rural-
based.""poor democracies don't spend any more on their health and education
sectors as a percentage of GDP than do poor autocracies, nor do they get higher
levels of foreign assistance. They don't run up higher levels of budget deficits. They
simply manage the resources that they have more effectively."

• The governance effectiveness of governments has a major impact on the

delivery of socioeconomic outcomes for poor populations

Weak rule of law can discourage investment and thus perpetuate poverty.
Poor management of resource revenues can mean that rather than lifting countries
out of poverty, revenues from such activities as oil production or gold mining
actually leads to a resource curse.
Failure by governments to provide essential infrastructure worsens poverty.
 • Poor access to affordable education traps individuals and countries in cycles
of poverty.

High levels of corruption undermine efforts to make a sustainable impact on

poverty. In Nigeria, for example, more than $400 billion was stolen from the treasury
by Nigeria's leaders between 1960 and 1999.[40][41]
Welfare states have an effect on poverty reduction. Currently modern, expansive
welfare states that ensure economic opportunity, independence and security in a
near universal manner are still the exclusive domain of the developed nations,
commonly constituting at least 20% of GDP, with the largest Scandinavian welfare
states constituting over 40% of GDP. These modern welfare states, which largely
arose in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, seeing their greatest expansion in the
mid 20th century, and have proven themselves highly effective in reducing relative
as well as absolute poverty in all analyzed high-income OECD countries.